Excalibur Squadron OOC Thread

[Grenartia]

I've been thinking about starting an RP set during an alternate Korean War, one where the Soviet Union and PRC collaborated on a bioengineered virus that goes horribly wrong (think kind of like a more realistic 28 Days Later, if instead of 2000s UK, it was set during early 50s Korea). I don't plan on doing it anytime soon, mainly because I haven't entirely fleshed out the opening premise. But I have been thinking about it.

[Morrdh]

And?

The Hunter was called the Spitfire of the Jet Age for a reason.

Sabre. The grandson of the best Allied fighter of WWII, and the world's largest producer of MiG-15 parts.

The Swiss and Chuck Yeager would rate the Hunter higher than the Sabre.

@Mon; Pilots rated the EE Lightning as, and I quote, being "better than sex".

[The Tiger Kingdom]

...And on that note, I'm out to my internet-less retreat for the weekend. I don't know exactly when I'll be able to get posting time back again, but it'll be no later than Tuesday night and no earlier than Sunday night.
So keep holding on, you hold outs, and have fun for the next few days.
Ideally without turning the OOC thread into some sort of EH-style haven of off-topic debauchery.

[Grenartia]

Sabre. The grandson of the best Allied fighter of WWII, and the world's largest producer of MiG-15 parts.

The Swiss and Chuck Yeager would rate the Hunter higher than the Sabre.

@Mon; Pilots rated the EE Lightning as, and I quote, being "better than sex".

This is going to basically be the Spitfire vs Mustang debate part deux: electric boogaloo edition, isn't it?

...And on that note, I'm out to my internet-less retreat for the weekend. I don't know exactly when I'll be able to get posting time back again, but it'll be no later than Tuesday night and no earlier than Sunday night.
So keep holding on, you hold outs, and have fun for the next few days.
Ideally without turning the OOC thread into some sort of EH-style haven of off-topic debauchery.

I'll try, whenever I'm online. I'll probably be spending most of my weekend celebrating my and my brother's birthday with our dad.

[Morrdh]

The Swiss and Chuck Yeager would rate the Hunter higher than the Sabre.

@Mon; Pilots rated the EE Lightning as, and I quote, being "better than sex".

This is going to basically be the Spitfire vs Mustang debate part deux: electric boogaloo edition, isn't it?

No not really.

I would say the Spitfire and Mustang were the best fighters during WW2 of their respective countries, they both deserve an equal footing amongst the best planes the Allies had.

As for the Sabre vs Hunter, it was proven time and again that the Hunter was able to outperform the Sabre without breaking a sweat.

[Grenartia]

This is going to basically be the Spitfire vs Mustang debate part deux: electric boogaloo edition, isn't it?

No not really.

I would say the Spitfire and Mustang were the best fighters during WW2 of their respective countries, they both deserve an equal footing amongst the best planes the Allies had.

As for the Sabre vs Hunter, it was proven time and again that the Hunter was able to outperform the Sabre without breaking a sweat.

I'll grant that it is descended from the awesomeness that is the Tempest. But I don't see where it was proven that it could outperform the Sabre.

[Goram]

No not really.

I would say the Spitfire and Mustang were the best fighters during WW2 of their respective countries, they both deserve an equal footing amongst the best planes the Allies had.

As for the Sabre vs Hunter, it was proven time and again that the Hunter was able to outperform the Sabre without breaking a sweat.

I'll grant that it is descended from the awesomeness that is the Tempest. But I don't see where it was proven that it could outperform the Sabre.

Against the North American/Canadaire Sabre, the Hunter is better. It's about 40 knots faster than the Sabre, it climbs faster, it's got much heavier weaponry and it's got powered controls.

The only Sabre variant, if you ask me, that could be a match for the Hunter is the CAC Sabre, which is an extensive redesign of the original air frame.

[Morrdh]

No not really.

I would say the Spitfire and Mustang were the best fighters during WW2 of their respective countries, they both deserve an equal footing amongst the best planes the Allies had.

As for the Sabre vs Hunter, it was proven time and again that the Hunter was able to outperform the Sabre without breaking a sweat.

I'll grant that it is descended from the awesomeness that is the Tempest. But I don't see where it was proven that it could outperform the Sabre.

It was evaluated by Chuck Yeager as part of a series of trials to find an aircraft to equip NATO's European forces, because of Chuck's assessment the US brought 950 Hunters.

The Hunter and Sabre went head-to-head in a competition run by the Swiss Air Force when they were looking for a new plane, Hunter won hands down as it outperformed the Sabre and could carry the same war load as the Sabre but twice the distance or twice the war load but the same distance as the Sabre.

[Grenartia]

I'll grant that it is descended from the awesomeness that is the Tempest. But I don't see where it was proven that it could outperform the Sabre.

Against the North American/Canadaire Sabre, the Hunter is better. It's about 40 knots faster than the Sabre, it climbs faster, it's got much heavier weaponry and it's got powered controls.

The only Sabre variant, if you ask me, that could be a match for the Hunter is the CAC Sabre, which is an extensive redesign of the original air frame.

Well, granted, considering the Hunter was introduced after the Sabre, logical. However, while not so much a variant as a derivative, the Super Sabre's stats are on par with the Hunter's.

[Morrdh]

Against the North American/Canadaire Sabre, the Hunter is better. It's about 40 knots faster than the Sabre, it climbs faster, it's got much heavier weaponry and it's got powered controls.

The only Sabre variant, if you ask me, that could be a match for the Hunter is the CAC Sabre, which is an extensive redesign of the original air frame.

Well, granted, considering the Hunter was introduced after the Sabre, logical. However, while not so much a variant as a derivative, the Super Sabre's stats are on par with the Hunter's.

Though the Hunter is still in service with at least one air force and is used (via contractors) by the US Navy to simulate a cruise missile during training drills on its warships.

[Goram]

Against the North American/Canadaire Sabre, the Hunter is better. It's about 40 knots faster than the Sabre, it climbs faster, it's got much heavier weaponry and it's got powered controls.

The only Sabre variant, if you ask me, that could be a match for the Hunter is the CAC Sabre, which is an extensive redesign of the original air frame.

Well, granted, considering the Hunter was introduced after the Sabre, logical. However, while not so much a variant as a derivative, the Super Sabre's stats are on par with the Hunter's.

The Super Sabre is to the Sabre what the Super Hornet is to the Hornet.

[Grenartia]

Well, granted, considering the Hunter was introduced after the Sabre, logical. However, while not so much a variant as a derivative, the Super Sabre's stats are on par with the Hunter's.

Though the Hunter is still in service with at least one air force and is used (via contractors) by the US Navy to simulate a cruise missile during training drills on its warships.

True.

Well, granted, considering the Hunter was introduced after the Sabre, logical. However, while not so much a variant as a derivative, the Super Sabre's stats are on par with the Hunter's.

The Super Sabre is to the Sabre what the Super Hornet is to the Hornet.

Also true.


However, I have found something which keeps the Sabre in the running.

M. M. Alam was the first ever honored fighter pilot for PAF, listed on top in the hall of famers list at the PAF Museum in Karachi. Alam is considered as a national hero for Pakistan, most significantly, for his remarkable show of brilliance in the war of 1965 when he was posted at Sargodha. During this war he was involved in various dogfights while flying his F-86 Sabre fighter. He downed nine Indian fighters in air-to-air combat, including six Hawker Hunter fighters.

In one mission on 7 September 1965, Alam downed five Indian aircraft in less than a minute, the first four within 30 seconds, establishing a world record, with total of 9 aircraft downed in the war. Alam's confirmed kills are as follows:

September 6, 1965, 1× Hawker Hunter
Squadron Leader Ajit Kumar Rawlley, No. 7 Sqn, KIA near Tarn Taran.
September 7, 1965, 5× Hawker Hunters
Squadron Leader Onkar Nath Kacker, No. 27 Sqn, POW
Squadron Leader A B Devayya, No. 7 Sqn also claimed by Flt Lt Amjad Hussain
Squadron Leader Suresh B Bhagwat, No. 7 Sqn
Flight Lieutenant B Guha, No. 7 Sqn
Flying Officer Jagdev Singh Brar, No. 7 Sqn, KIA, near Sangla Hill.
September 16, 1965, 1× Hawker Hunter
Flying Officer Farokh Dara Bunsha, No. 7 Sqn, KIA, near Amritsar.

Emphasis mine.

[Morrdh]

However, I have found something which keeps the Sabre in the running.

M. M. Alam was the first ever honored fighter pilot for PAF, listed on top in the hall of famers list at the PAF Museum in Karachi. Alam is considered as a national hero for Pakistan, most significantly, for his remarkable show of brilliance in the war of 1965 when he was posted at Sargodha. During this war he was involved in various dogfights while flying his F-86 Sabre fighter. He downed nine Indian fighters in air-to-air combat, including six Hawker Hunter fighters.

In one mission on 7 September 1965, Alam downed five Indian aircraft in less than a minute, the first four within 30 seconds, establishing a world record, with total of 9 aircraft downed in the war. Alam's confirmed kills are as follows:

September 6, 1965, 1× Hawker Hunter
Squadron Leader Ajit Kumar Rawlley, No. 7 Sqn, KIA near Tarn Taran.
September 7, 1965, 5× Hawker Hunters
Squadron Leader Onkar Nath Kacker, No. 27 Sqn, POW
Squadron Leader A B Devayya, No. 7 Sqn also claimed by Flt Lt Amjad Hussain
Squadron Leader Suresh B Bhagwat, No. 7 Sqn
Flight Lieutenant B Guha, No. 7 Sqn
Flying Officer Jagdev Singh Brar, No. 7 Sqn, KIA, near Sangla Hill.
September 16, 1965, 1× Hawker Hunter
Flying Officer Farokh Dara Bunsha, No. 7 Sqn, KIA, near Amritsar.

Emphasis mine.

Most of that is from Pakistani sources or listed as needing citations.

Also; The Pakistan Air Force figures have been disputed by Indian sources which claim Alam made four kills, attributing one of the losses of Sqn Ldr Onkar Nath Kacker's aircraft to booster failure or some other cause including the possibility of ground fire. They also claim that gun camera footage of Alam's kills is yet to be made public and therefore some of the kills cannot be confirmed.

There is a big difference between claimed and confirmed kills, plus fighter pilots are notorious for inflating their scores.

[Grenartia]

However, I have found something which keeps the Sabre in the running.



Emphasis mine.

Most of that is from Pakistani sources or listed as needing citations.

Also; The Pakistan Air Force figures have been disputed by Indian sources which claim Alam made four kills, attributing one of the losses of Sqn Ldr Onkar Nath Kacker's aircraft to booster failure or some other cause including the possibility of ground fire. They also claim that gun camera footage of Alam's kills is yet to be made public and therefore some of the kills cannot be confirmed.

There is a big difference between claimed and confirmed kills, plus fighter pilots are notorious for inflating their scores.

Granted, though "O' Nordeen, Lon (1985). Air Warfare in the Missile Age. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. pp. 84–87. ISBN 978-0-87474-680-8." sounds like a fairly independent and credible source. As does " Polmar, Norman; Bell, Dana (2003). One hundred years of world military aircraft. Naval Institute Press. p. 354. ISBN 978-1-59114-686-5. "

Both of which back up the claim.

[Goram]

Most of that is from Pakistani sources or listed as needing citations.

Also; The Pakistan Air Force figures have been disputed by Indian sources which claim Alam made four kills, attributing one of the losses of Sqn Ldr Onkar Nath Kacker's aircraft to booster failure or some other cause including the possibility of ground fire. They also claim that gun camera footage of Alam's kills is yet to be made public and therefore some of the kills cannot be confirmed.

There is a big difference between claimed and confirmed kills, plus fighter pilots are notorious for inflating their scores.

Granted, though "O' Nordeen, Lon (1985). Air Warfare in the Missile Age. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. pp. 84–87. ISBN 978-0-87474-680-8." sounds like a fairly independent and credible source. As does " Polmar, Norman; Bell, Dana (2003). One hundred years of world military aircraft. Naval Institute Press. p. 354. ISBN 978-1-59114-686-5. "

Both of which back up the claim.

Yes, they are reputable sources. I've looked at both of them, in the last few months, for a paper I've got to write.

However, you're missing the point. The authors are reputable sources, yes, but the information they are using is not always correct.

For example? The vast majority of works on the Gulf War (1991) will tell you that the Coalition lost no aircraft in air-to-air action. I can tell you now that that is incorrect, as in 2001, the CIA released a report confirming that Cpt. Scott Speicher's F/A-18 was shot down by a MiG-25. Another example, M.R.D. Foot's groundbreaking work on the SOE. Some of the contents of that book are massively outdated now, because when Foot wrote the book much of the SOE's information was still classified (and a lot of it still is). These things do not make a book any less reputable, far from it, however, you've always got to consider where the author has got his material from. It may not be 100% accurate, especially in a case, such as this, where it is entirely possible that records have been falsified.

No single work should ever be taken as gospel truth.

[Grenartia]

Granted, though "O' Nordeen, Lon (1985). Air Warfare in the Missile Age. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. pp. 84–87. ISBN 978-0-87474-680-8." sounds like a fairly independent and credible source. As does " Polmar, Norman; Bell, Dana (2003). One hundred years of world military aircraft. Naval Institute Press. p. 354. ISBN 978-1-59114-686-5. "

Both of which back up the claim.

Yes, they are reputable sources. I've looked at both of them, in the last few months, for a paper I've got to write.

However, you're missing the point. The authors are reputable sources, yes, but the information they are using is not always correct.

For example? The vast majority of works on the Gulf War (1991) will tell you that the Coalition lost no aircraft in air-to-air action. I can tell you now that that is incorrect, as in 2001, the CIA released a report confirming that Cpt. Scott Speicher's F/A-18 was shot down by a MiG-25. Another example, M.R.D. Foot's groundbreaking work on the SOE. Some of the contents of that book are massively outdated now, because when Foot wrote the book much of the SOE's information was still classified (and a lot of it still is). These things do not make a book any less reputable, far from it, however, you've always got to consider where the author has got his material from. It may not be 100% accurate, especially in a case, such as this, where it is entirely possible that records have been falsified.

No single work should ever be taken as gospel truth.

This is all true. However, we can only argue from what knowledge we have access to. And I'm much more inclined to believe reports that reputable sources back up than not. US institutions are generally known for doing pretty damn good fact-checking.

[The balkens]

Unknown location

"so......this is the man that caused me so much trouble? I'm rather unimpressed."
Dietrich looked down upon his prize: Michael Zilorski. Pilot who killed so many of his comrades in Poland and France.
"Herr Zimmermann, Herr Sporenburgs Techniques caused his current......unconciousness."
Dietrich turned his head towards friend and ally; Hans. "I know. I am also aware of the last time a doctor tried to extract a tooth. Apparently, the prisoner Nearly ate his face off."

Zimmermann grabbed Zilorski's jaw, opening his mouth. "mein Gott, look at that Tooth; he's like a damn vampire."

Unbeknownst to Dietrich, Michael could hear everything that they were saying. He grunted.
"WHAT THE FUCK?!" cried Hans. "Calm down! It appears that our guest is alive." Dietrich smiled.

"who the fuck are you? You're not like hitlers fuck toy...." Michael said, he was tired and his eyes were bloodshot.
"allow me to introduce myself; I am Dietrich Zimmerm-" "enough of the foreplay." Michael interrupted. "I had a car battery rigged to my balls for god knows how long, some poor bastard nearly got his face eaten off by me. Now some little shit like you thinks he can break me? Fuck you." "dear god, how were you so useful to Excalibur?!" Dietrich lost his nerve already. Michael cackled in defiance.
Dietrich smirked. "you must be mistaken me for....one of them. I am here to guarantee that your transportation to berlin goes as planned." Michael as now totally confused. "what?" dietrich sighed loudly. "I am not SS or gestapo, I am a Luftwaffe pilot that you had the misfortune of pissing off!" "is it because that I killed so many of your comrades? well boo-fucking-hoo for you."
Dietrich curled his hand into a fist and slammed it into Michaels stomach. as Michael reared in pain, Dietrich calmed himself.
"you fight with a grudge against people like me, do you? your home was destroyed, family members killed...a mother perhaps."

Michael shook in sheer anger, he still felt guilty. what noble said back then didn't help. "when I get out of here...ill kill every last one of your colleagues, then ill save you for last.-" dietrich began to clap his hands. "congratulations! you have set a goal for yourself; kill every man you see wearing the Totenkopf." Michael was furious, was this guy just fucking with him? he started to have flashes. pictures of his mothers corpse filled his mind, what began was a whisper in the back of his head became a plea in the front of his mind. "mother...." "what?" Dietrich asked. "mother..." Michael began to tremble. then, something snapped. his lungs filled with air and he let out a mighty burst of anger and guilt, Hans covered his ears.

yes....YES! Dietrich knew what he had done. he unleashed something terrible upon the world. "Hans, lets go." as they exited the chamber. Dietrich couldn't help but feel sorry, he tapped into michaels memories and pulled out something that could not be contained. he unleashed a new weapon on his unsuspecting comrades, Michael is going to prove to be very useful to him.

[Kassaran]

Hey, when I wake up, what time DID people wake up on the base in the mornings during WWII at Tempsford? I am just curious because the lady interogatin' Smaude, Claude, whatshisface said it was 0806 in her title and I just wanna be accurate about my whereabouts at around that time... ^_^

[Goram]

Hey, when I wake up, what time DID people wake up on the base in the mornings during WWII at Tempsford? I am just curious because the lady interogatin' Smaude, Claude, whatshisface said it was 0806 in her title and I just wanna be accurate about my whereabouts at around that time... ^_^

On fighter bases, early. On bomber fields, not so much.

Anyway, Stanford needs to make sure he's still got it (after being badly wounded) and your chap seems like he needs to make a mark on the unit. Mock dogfight time.

[Kassaran]

Hey, when I wake up, what time DID people wake up on the base in the mornings during WWII at Tempsford? I am just curious because the lady interogatin' Smaude, Claude, whatshisface said it was 0806 in her title and I just wanna be accurate about my whereabouts at around that time... ^_^

On fighter bases, early. On bomber fields, not so much.

Anyway, Stanford needs to make sure he's still got it (after being badly wounded) and your chap seems like he needs to make a mark on the unit. Mock dogfight time.

BUT, BUT, Where am I as of 0806? I need to still inspect my plane, make sure the guns are set to my preferred convergence range of 400 meters, AND I have to eat!

[Goram]

On fighter bases, early. On bomber fields, not so much.

Anyway, Stanford needs to make sure he's still got it (after being badly wounded) and your chap seems like he needs to make a mark on the unit. Mock dogfight time.

BUT, BUT, Where am I as of 0806? I need to still inspect my plane, make sure the guns are set to my preferred convergence range of 400 meters, AND I have to eat!

I'd say everyone is up by six. Set your convergence in close - we've got .303 calibre machine guns. The closer you get, the better.

[Kouralia]

BUT, BUT, Where am I as of 0806? I need to still inspect my plane, make sure the guns are set to my preferred convergence range of 400 meters, AND I have to eat!

I'd say everyone is up by six. Set your convergence in close - we've got .303 calibre machine guns. The closer you get, the better.

late fuckers.

NCOS UP BY 0530. D:<

[Kassaran]

I'd say everyone is up by six. Set your convergence in close - we've got .303 calibre machine guns. The closer you get, the better.

late fuckers.

NCOS UP BY 0530. D:<

So I should be up by 0512 to impress Smythe, be in my jumpers by 0530 and cleaned up, make my bed, the usual, then move tothe hangars for early morning inspection of my craft, go to the mess at 0615, then return to finish the inspection, fuel up at 0650, then spin up and be ready to go for a mock dogfight?

[Kassaran]

Also, where can I read up on previous dogfights in this thread and how they work out?

[Goram]

late fuckers.

NCOS UP BY 0530. D:<

So I should be up by 0512 to impress Smythe, be in my jumpers by 0530 and cleaned up, make my bed, the usual, then move tothe hangars for early morning inspection of my craft, go to the mess at 0615, then return to finish the inspection, fuel up at 0650, then spin up and be ready to go for a mock dogfight?

Wait for the sun to come up haha, we'll go at about 8.

There's some in the Tempsford page. At least one in Taurus.